STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Vs. AMIT @ VICKY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Crl.M.A.No.13491/2015 (Delay)

(2.) Respondent Amit @ Vicky and Rajvinder Singh @ Arjun Singh were charged under Sections 307 and 341 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC", for short). During the trial, Rajvinder Singh @ Arjun Singh expired and the proceedings against him stood abated vide order dated 2nd July, 2014. As per the prosecution version in the charge-sheet, Rajvinder Singh @ Arjun Singh was the prime perpetrator who had inflicted injuries on the chest of Ashiq-ul-Amin @ Chunnu (PW-3) with a scissor. The respondent to the present petition, Amit @ Vicky, was charge-sheeted by relying upon Section 34 of the IPC on the ground that he had shared common intention and would be vicariously liable. The trial court in the impugned judgment dated 9th September, 2014 has elaborately dealt with the factual matrix emerging from the ocular testimonies and held that the prosecution has not been able to prove the charge against the Amit @ Vicky beyond reasonable doubt. Amit @ Vicky has been acquitted.

(3.) Ashiq-ul-Amin @ Chunnu (PW-3) in his deposition asserts that on 2nd October, 2005 he alongwith his friend Ajay, while returning home, had stopped at the barber shop of Wasim. There one Gyani i.e. Rajvinder Singh gave him a blow with a scissor on the left side of his chest. At that time, Amit @ Vicky was present. No role or words were attributed and given to Amit @ Vicky, when the aforesaid injury was caused. Amit @ Vicky had, thereafter, as per PW-3, had caught him, as Gyani i.e. Rajvinder Singh had again tried to stab PW-3 with the scissor. PW-3 had pushed Amit @ Vicky aside and escaped. PW-3 has alleged that both Rajvinder and Amit @ Vicky had kicked and given fist blows to his friend Ajay. The said Ajay has not deposed and appeared as a witness. Ashiq-ul-Amin @ Chunnu (PW-3) has not elaborated and given reason and cause as to why the occurrence had happened. The cause of dispute and injury remains unexplained.